Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I don't even know if he needs more then a single title, his numbers, and defense are already better. Another MVP and title would secure it imo.

For sure his defense is better, but his overall numbers aren't that much better for me to give him a significant edge. Bird also didn't join a super team to win his titles. Bird in his prime was a statistical monster...I honestly don't know if Lebron had a better year that this:

30 PPG, 9.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 53% FG, 40% 3PT, 92% FT

.608 TS%, .556 eFG%, .243 WS/48

If Lebron won his title on a conventional "non superteam" I might agree with you. But since he decided to team up with Wade and Bosh I have to handicap him a bit...thats why I said 2 more titles and 1 MVP or 3 titles and no more MPV's.

You also have to take competition into account. Lebron didn't have to face any great rival in the finals yet nor has he had an opponent as great as the showtime Lakers or even the the 81 Sixers for that matter. The 80's were far more competitive than the current era and therefore the degree of difficulty in winning a title must be taken into account. The 2012 playoff match ups that the Heat went through to win their title would have been a cake walk for most of Birds Celtic teams in the 80's. In addition, Bird didn't have teammates as good as Wade and Bosh. Therefore Lebron's one title isn't worth as much as one of Larry's.

I give Lebron credit for being the slightly better individual talent statistically and defensively and have weighed that into my assessment that he would need either 2 more titles and 1 MVP or 3 titles and no more MVP's.

If Lebron won his title on a conventional "non superteam" I might agree with you. But since he decided to team up with Wade and Bosh I have to handicap him a bit...thats why I said 2 more titles and 1 MVP or 3 titles and no more MPV's.

I also want to ask Laker fans this, who make your ridiculous claim. Are you ready for all the **** you will get when you win or lose with a top 3, 5, 20, 20 player this season? Because you were more than willing to whine about it the other way around. Apparently being drafted into a perfect situation makes it okay, versus SEEKING a great situation.

Hypocricy at its finest.

If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

I also want to ask Laker fans this, who make your ridiculous claim. Are you ready for all the **** you will get when you win or lose with a top 3, 5, 20, 20 player this season? Because you were more than willing to whine about it the other way around. Apparently being drafted into a perfect situation makes it okay, versus SEEKING a great situation.

Hypocricy at its finest.

Strawman argument...I thought we were debating Bird and Lebron, not Kobe and Lebron.

But I will answer your question.

It depends on how the Lakers might lose. Remember, if they make it to the finals and lose to Miami in a 7 game hard fought series with out HCA it won't be such a failure as Miami has gotten even stronger than last year and it's much easier for them to secure HCA in the east than it is for the Lakers in the west. If the Lakers lose to OKC in the WCF or to Miami in 5 or less, due to Kobe shooting them out of the series or some other blunder, than it is a failure for sure.

Remember, Lebron didn't have to go to Miami to form a "superteam"...he could have easily gone to Chicago or NY and he still would have been on a good team. It was his choice to go for overkill and therefore we have to account for that degree of difficulty or lack there of when assessing his legacy and comparing him to other greats.

And in answer to your question, no he probably would not have left and if he still did then it would be a supreme failure.

Remember, its the greatness of ones opponents that makes one truly great.

My main problem with this discussion is the position it self, most other potions are defined, there were several great centers the best is probably Kareem, though Russel was probably the best Defensive center and there are other guys deserving of consideration, with shooting gaurds it's the same thing, it goes MJ, Kobe, everyone else.

The problem with the 3 is that it is such a multidimensional position. You have guys like Durrant who is a straight up shooter, and guys like melo and lbj that are slashers, some like Ron Artest will get their points by banging bodies. When you ask who is the greatest small forward, you really have to break it down into other parts of the game. Then you have guys like Roddman, who wasn't a scorer as much, but was maybe the greatest rebounding forward of all time, and was tenacious on defense. Which got him to the hall of fame.

So when you ask who is the greatest 3 of all time you should ask who was the best at the different styles of the position

First of all who cares how they ended up on their respective teams, the greats are almost always on stacked teams. For you to claim Lebron is less of a player because he left via free agency instead of being handed a great team off the bat is a little ridiculous. You can dislike him for this, but dont discredit his game because the talent around him isnt better than what Bird had. Also you say take context of the talent he played against but fail to mention this amazing support he had was injured for part of the playoffs and he stepped up big time.

Also I think agree that Bird has had the best regular season between the two, at least numbers wise. Lebron however has had the best overall season between the two IMO.

Strawman argument...I thought we were debating Bird and Lebron, not Kobe and Lebron.

But I will answer your question.

It depends on how the Lakers might lose. Remember, if they make it to the finals and lose to Miami in a 7 game hard fought series with out HCA it won't be such a failure as Miami has gotten even stronger than last year and it's much easier for them to secure HCA in the east than it is for the Lakers in the west. If the Lakers lose to OKC in the WCF or to Miami in 5 or less, due to Kobe shooting them out of the series or some other blunder, than it is a failure for sure.

Remember, Lebron didn't have to go to Miami to form a "superteam"...he could have easily gone to Chicago or NY and he still would have been on a good team. It was his choice to go for overkill and therefore we have to account for that degree of difficulty or lack there of when assessing his legacy and comparing him to other greats.

And in answer to your question, no he probably would not have left and if he still did then it would be a supreme failure.

Remember, its the greatness of ones opponents that makes one truly great.

OKC is super team, look at who they have! If this team came together through free agency we would call it a super team. They are pretty good.

Also, had he gone to Chi and wade wanted to come home and went with him, wouldn't that be just as much of a super team? If he had gone to the knicks with Stoudomire and someone else wouldn't that be a super team?

How is this title tainted? Is it his fault that he couldn't get anyone to come to Cleveland? or that after coming into the league he made his team so much better that they didn't have high enough draft picks to get the premier talent at the top of the draft? Whats the difference between a GM building a super team through the draft and trades like in Seattle/OKC or the players doing it themselves?

If Scottie Pippen were to have a team of his own, I feel he'd definitely be in the talks for best SF of all time. The only reason he's not in the talks now is because he was playing in the shadow of the greatest player of all time.

Depending on whether or not LeBron gets a few more rings to his name, I say he has a good chance in being better than Larry Bird.

Pippin wouldn't have ever become as good as he was without playing/practicing with Jordan though either.

This is definately a racial thing. Lebron vs bird is a joke. Lebron would embarrass the guy in the court.

You can only compare guys against the guys they played against. Everything else is conjecture.

What is not conjecture is that Bird rose to the challenge - by the likes of Magic, Erving, Jordan, etc. and didn't fold and crap his pants like LBJ has in 3 of the last 5 years in the playoffs. Bird in 1980-1987 played at a level LBJ has not as of yet played at.

It's nice to be an athletic freak, it's better to be a better shooter, passer, and leader.

6/27/09: “We expect [Rondo] to play by the rules and be a leader as a point guard. We need him to be more of a leader,” Ainge said. “There were just a couple situations where he was late this year, I don’t know if he was sitting in his car, but showed up late and the rest of the team was there. We have team rules and you have to be on time. He was fined for being late, he said he was stuck in traffic, and it’s just unacceptable.”